I believe the point of the Platform is so that the vast majority of
developers have a stable, full featured Haskell environment to work from,
and can mostly just use and depend on it.
It is not an aim that the platform's library set should be a
"super-Prelude" that works multiple Haskell Implementations. That isn't to
say we shouldn't be cautious about admitting packages using more exotic
features of GHC: we should. But our caution should stem from concern about
how they will impact user's code, and likely longevity and popularity of
such extensions. Admittedly all such choices will come down to taste.
Further, we need to grow the HP significantly, especially to include
commonly needed functionality for which there are existing packages in wide
use. These packages, by and large, only developed, built, and used against
GHC, and now often include features that aren't H98.
Therefore, the idea of requiring all packages in HP to be H98 is just a
non-starter.
I would welcome other compiler teams being involved with HP. But until they
are, there is no real basis for trying to match their restrictions.
- Mark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20130120/7444c6d4/attachment.htm>